Yahoo Groups archive

MOTM

Index last updated: 2026-04-03 22:10 UTC

Thread

Mixers....again.

Mixers....again.

1999-10-10 by Paul Schreiber

After reading over the previous inputs, and researching the potentional
op amps that are both low drift and decent audio quality, here is what I've
decided to build:

The mixer has 6 inputs, 2 outputs. Each input has an attenuator.

One output (called the SUB) uses a special switching jack (it is a
Switchcraft 113). This jack
has an isolated contact that is actuated when the plug is inserted. Unlike
the current 112A jacks,
it is not connected to the signal path. It's just a switch.

This switch controls 7(!) analog switches. The mixer is set up "normally"
with 6 inputs and 1 output.
3 inputs have log pots, and 3 inputs have linear pots. If you are mixing 2
or 3 audio signals, you
use the log input channels. Certainly, you can use 1 or more linear
channels, too (but the controls are
more sensitive to small rotational increments). The linear channels are for
DC control voltages, but again
you can use the log ones, too. I am guessing 90% of the time 2 or 3 signals
is all you are mixing.

There are 2 GAIN pots. In the default 6:1 configuration, only 1 GAIN knob is
active: it controls the master
gain. The other knob is shorted out by an analog switch.

NOW.......if you plug a patchcord into the SUB OUT jack, lots of stuff
happens. The mixer is split into 2 seperate
3:1 sections. The aforementioned dead GAIN pot now is active for the linear
section (it's a linear pot, too).
The former master GAIN pot controls the log section (it's a log pot).

When you go to dual 3:1, the feedback resistor in the summer is switched.
So, there will be a gain change of
nearly 2:1 when you do this. You will have to watch out! This is so the
smaller 3:1 sections can get maximum
dynamic range, as well as when we are in 6:1 mode.

The opamps used are (currently, until I find a better one) Analog Devices
AD822s. These have low drift (about
9 times LOWER than a TL072) and about 4 times LOWER offset
voltage.Generally, the *drift* is what is important,
and also we need decent audio performance. I'm also going to look at the
OP-285. Also, the same low-drift
precision resistors used in the MOTM-300 VCO front end are used.

I think this design is a good tradeoff with the proposed solutions. It offer
6:1 or dual 3:1, does not require expensive dual pots,
and handles audio and CVs. I will bootstrap the output sections to drive
1500pf loads (about 20 feet of cable).

I'll start breadboarding in about 10 days (about how low AD takes for a
sample request) and hopefully can offer
it at the same time the MOTM-440 filter ships. Since there are 8 jacks and 8
pots, the kit will be around $139.

Paul S.

Re: Mixers....again.

1999-10-10 by JWBarlow@xxx.xxx

This sounds great! I like the idea of changing the gain level when switching 
from dual to mono mode. I'm sure that I would be using dual 3 to 1 mixers the 
majority of the time. It might be a good idea to label the two sides of the 
mixer LINEAR and LOG as a visual reminder of which pots are which.

John B.

In a message dated 10/9/99 9:57:34 PM, synth1@... writes:
Show quoted textHide quoted text
>After reading over the previous inputs, and researching the potentional
>op amps that are both low drift and decent audio quality, here is what
>I've
>decided to build:

>The mixer has 6 inputs, 2 outputs. Each input has an attenuator.

>One output (called the SUB) uses a special switching jack (it is a
>Switchcraft 113). This jack
>has an isolated contact that is actuated when the plug is inserted. Unlike
>the current 112A jacks,
>it is not connected to the signal path. It's just a switch.

>This switch controls 7(!) analog switches. The mixer is set up "normally"
>with 6 inputs and 1 output.
>3 inputs have log pots, and 3 inputs have linear pots. If you are mixing
>2
>or 3 audio signals, you
>use the log input channels. Certainly, you can use 1 or more linear
>channels, too (but the controls are
>more sensitive to small rotational increments). The linear channels are
>for
>DC control voltages, but again
>you can use the log ones, too. I am guessing 90% of the time 2 or 3 signals
>is all you are mixing.

>There are 2 GAIN pots. In the default 6:1 configuration, only 1 GAIN knob
>is
>active: it controls the master
>gain. The other knob is shorted out by an analog switch.

>NOW.......if you plug a patchcord into the SUB OUT jack, lots of stuff
>happens. The mixer is split into 2 seperate
>3:1 sections. The aforementioned dead GAIN pot now is active for the linear
>section (it's a linear pot, too).
>The former master GAIN pot controls the log section (it's a log pot).

>When you go to dual 3:1, the feedback resistor in the summer is switched.
>So, there will be a gain change of
>nearly 2:1 when you do this. You will have to watch out! This is so the
>smaller 3:1 sections can get maximum
>dynamic range, as well as when we are in 6:1 mode.

>The opamps used are (currently, until I find a better one) Analog Devices
>AD822s. These have low drift (about
>9 times LOWER than a TL072) and about 4 times LOWER offset
>voltage.Generally, the *drift* is what is important,
>and also we need decent audio performance. I'm also going to look at the
>OP-285. Also, the same low-drift
>precision resistors used in the MOTM-300 VCO front end are used.

>I think this design is a good tradeoff with the proposed solutions. It
>offer
>6:1 or dual 3:1, does not require expensive dual pots,
>and handles audio and CVs. I will bootstrap the output sections to drive
>1500pf loads (about 20 feet of cable).

>I'll start breadboarding in about 10 days (about how low AD takes for a
>sample request) and hopefully can offer
>it at the same time the MOTM-440 filter ships. Since there are 8 jacks
>and 8
>pots, the kit will be around $139.

Re: Mixers....again.

1999-10-10 by J. Larry Hendry

> From: JWBarlow@...
> 
> This sounds great! I like the idea of changing the gain level when
switching 
> from dual to mono mode. I'm sure that I would be using dual 3 to 1 mixers
the 
> majority of the time. It might be a good idea to label the two sides of
the 
> mixer LINEAR and LOG as a visual reminder of which pots are which.

Ditto,
LH

RE: Mixers....again.

1999-10-11 by Dave Bradley

Paul,

Sounds like a reasonable design. To do anything more (with pan, for
instance), you'd have to go to a wider panel.

When we originally discussed this, you were not happy with the idea of a
gain pot that was dead part of the time. What changed your mind?

Dave
Show quoted textHide quoted text
> From: "Paul Schreiber" <synth1@...>
>
> After reading over the previous inputs, and researching the potentional
> op amps that are both low drift and decent audio quality, here is
> what I've
> decided to build:
>
> The mixer has 6 inputs, 2 outputs. Each input has an attenuator.
>

> There are 2 GAIN pots. In the default 6:1 configuration, only 1
> GAIN knob is
> active: it controls the master
> gain. The other knob is shorted out by an analog switch.
>
> NOW.......if you plug a patchcord into the SUB OUT jack, lots of stuff
> happens. The mixer is split into 2 seperate
> 3:1 sections. The aforementioned dead GAIN pot now is active for
> the linear
> section (it's a linear pot, too).
> The former master GAIN pot controls the log section (it's a log pot).
>

RE: Mixers....again.

1999-10-11 by Dave Bradley

> >When we originally discussed this, you were not happy with the idea of a
> >gain pot that was dead part of the time. What changed your mind?
>
>
> I decided that this was the best compromise. And I don't like dual pots.
>

I agree. Any ideas on how to clue in the user that the pot doesn't currently
do anything? I think maybe all that's needed is to tie the pot to the
switching jack with the labelling, maybe call the pot "Sub Mix" and the jack
"Sub Out"?

Dave
Show quoted textHide quoted text
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Paul Schreiber [mailto:synth1@...]
> Sent: Monday, October 11, 1999 10:32 AM
> To: motm@onelist.com
> Subject: Re: [motm] Mixers....again.
>
>
> From: "Paul Schreiber" <synth1@...>
>
> >
> >Sounds like a reasonable design. To do anything more (with pan, for
> >instance), you'd have to go to a wider panel.
>
>
> This is *not* a low-end Mackie. It's just for mixing signals
> within a patch.
>
> >
> Paul S.
>
> >

Re: Mixers....again.

1999-10-11 by Paul Schreiber

>
>Sounds like a reasonable design. To do anything more (with pan, for
>instance), you'd have to go to a wider panel.


This is *not* a low-end Mackie. It's just for mixing signals within a patch.

>
>When we originally discussed this, you were not happy with the idea of a
>gain pot that was dead part of the time. What changed your mind?


I decided that this was the best compromise. And I don't like dual pots.

Paul S.

Re: Mixers....again.

1999-10-11 by Paul Schreiber

Yep...SUB GAIN and SUB OUT.

Paul S.

-----Original Message-----
From: Dave Bradley <daveb@...>
To: motm@onelist.com <motm@onelist.com>
Date: Monday, October 11, 1999 10:37 AM
Subject: RE: [motm] Mixers....again.


>From: "Dave Bradley" <daveb@...>
>
>> >When we originally discussed this, you were not happy with the idea of a
>> >gain pot that was dead part of the time. What changed your mind?
>>
>>
>> I decided that this was the best compromise. And I don't like dual pots.
>>
>
>I agree. Any ideas on how to clue in the user that the pot doesn't
currently
>do anything? I think maybe all that's needed is to tie the pot to the
>switching jack with the labelling, maybe call the pot "Sub Mix" and the
jack
Show quoted textHide quoted text
>"Sub Out"?
>
>Dave
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Paul Schreiber [mailto:synth1@...]
>> Sent: Monday, October 11, 1999 10:32 AM
>> To: motm@onelist.com
>> Subject: Re: [motm] Mixers....again.
>>
>>
>> From: "Paul Schreiber" <synth1@...>
>>
>> >
>> >Sounds like a reasonable design. To do anything more (with pan, for
>> >instance), you'd have to go to a wider panel.
>>
>>
>> This is *not* a low-end Mackie. It's just for mixing signals
>> within a patch.
>>
>> >
>> Paul S.
>>
>> >
>
>>

RE: Mixers....again.

1999-10-11 by Dave Bradley

Ya want a panel mockup? I need:

layout and labels
module name

Inartistic Igor 
Show quoted textHide quoted text
> 
> From: "Paul Schreiber" <synth1@...>
> 
> Yep...SUB GAIN and SUB OUT.
> 
> Paul S.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dave Bradley <daveb@...>
> To: motm@onelist.com <motm@onelist.com>
> Date: Monday, October 11, 1999 10:37 AM
> Subject: RE: [motm] Mixers....again.
> 
> 
> >From: "Dave Bradley" <daveb@...>
> >
> >> >When we originally discussed this, you were not happy with 
> the idea of a
> >> >gain pot that was dead part of the time. What changed your mind?
> >>
> >>
> >> I decided that this was the best compromise. And I don't like 
> dual pots.
> >>
> >
> >I agree. Any ideas on how to clue in the user that the pot doesn't
> currently
> >do anything? I think maybe all that's needed is to tie the pot to the
> >switching jack with the labelling, maybe call the pot "Sub Mix" and the
> jack
> >"Sub Out"?
> >
> >Dave
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Paul Schreiber [mailto:synth1@...]
> >> Sent: Monday, October 11, 1999 10:32 AM
> >> To: motm@onelist.com
> >> Subject: Re: [motm] Mixers....again.
> >>
> >>
> >> From: "Paul Schreiber" <synth1@...>
> >>
> >> >
> >> >Sounds like a reasonable design. To do anything more (with pan, for
> >> >instance), you'd have to go to a wider panel.
> >>
> >>
> >> This is *not* a low-end Mackie. It's just for mixing signals
> >> within a patch.
> >>
> >> >
> >> Paul S.
> >>
> >> >
> >
> >>
> 
> >

Re: Mixers....again.

1999-10-12 by J. Larry Hendry

> > Paul wrote:
> > I decided that this was the best compromise. And I don't like dual
pots.
> 
> From: "Dave Bradley" <daveb@...>
> I agree. Any ideas on how to clue in the user that the pot doesn't
currently
> do anything? I think maybe all that's needed is to tie the pot to the
> switching jack with the labelling, maybe call the pot "Sub Mix" and the
jack
> "Sub Out"?
> 
> Dave

Oh come on Dave.  You can do better than that.  I say that the switch in
the 1/4 jack that drives the 7 analog switches should also drive a dual
colored LED that indicates whether the sub mix master gain is active or
not.  Say green if it is active and red if it is shut off.  

Stooge Larry (ducking) 
 :)

RE: Mixers....again.

1999-10-12 by Dave Bradley

> Oh come on Dave.  You can do better than that.  I say that the switch in
> the 1/4 jack that drives the 7 analog switches should also drive a dual
> colored LED that indicates whether the sub mix master gain is active or
> not.  Say green if it is active and red if it is shut off.
>
> Stooge Larry (ducking)

You will recall, my dear boy, that when this subject came up before, I made
the absolutely brilliant suggestion that the knob for the submix pot be
collapsible, and retract INTO the panel when it was out of the circuit.

Master of my Domain,

Moe

Re: Mixers....again.

1999-10-12 by J. Larry Hendry

> You will recall, my dear boy, that when this subject came up before, I
made
> the absolutely brilliant suggestion that the knob for the submix pot be
> collapsible, and retract INTO the panel when it was out of the circuit.
> 
> Master of my Domain,
> 
> Moe

I bow humbly in your presence oh greatest of the Stooges.  Please promise
not to knuckle-head me too bad.

Lowly Stooge Larry

RE: Mixers....again.

1999-10-13 by JWBarlow@xxx.xxx

My idea is that when a plug is NOT inserted into the jack, a uP is activated 
which looks at the voltage on the wiper of the sub pot. If that voltage 
changes over a short period of time that would indicate someone is turning 
the knob. The uP would then play a sample of Moe Howard saying "NOT THAT KNOB 
NUMBSKULL!!!!" I can think of three MOTM owners where this would not be out 
of place on their system.

JB
Got to start soldering up my 410 now -- though I'm thinking I might be better 
off getting a cat.

In a message dated 10/12/99 6:42:07 AM, daveb@... writes:
Show quoted textHide quoted text
>
>
>> Oh come on Dave.  You can do better than that.  I say that the switch
>in
>
>> the 1/4 jack that drives the 7 analog switches should also drive a dual
>
>> colored LED that indicates whether the sub mix master gain is active
>or
>
>> not.  Say green if it is active and red if it is shut off.
>
>>
>
>> Stooge Larry (ducking)
>
>
>
>You will recall, my dear boy, that when this subject came up before, I
>made
>
>the absolutely brilliant suggestion that the knob for the submix pot be
>
>collapsible, and retract INTO the panel when it was out of the circuit.
>
>
>
>Master of my Domain,
>
>
>
>Moe
>
>

Re: Mixers....again.

1999-10-13 by J. Larry Hendry

> From: JWBarlow@...
> 
> My idea is that when a plug is NOT inserted into the jack, a uP is
activated 
> which looks at the voltage on the wiper of the sub pot. If that voltage 
> changes over a short period of time that would indicate someone is
turning 
> the knob. The uP would then play a sample of Moe Howard saying "NOT THAT
KNOB 
> NUMBSKULL!!!!" I can think of three MOTM owners where this would not be
out 
> of place on their system.

Oh yeah !!!   I could go for that.  Now don't forget Shemp...
 
> JB
> Got to start soldering up my 410 now -- though I'm thinking I might be
better 
> off getting a cat.

Sob, couldn't get to the P.O. box today.  My poor 410 is still in postal
captivity.
Larry (looking for that darn cat)

Move to quarantaine

This moves the raw source file on disk only. The archive index is not changed automatically, so you still need to run a manual refresh afterward.